← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/60562/2023allowed

Bikramjeet Singh And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ANR

2024-03-12Ms. Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan3 pages

- 1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 12.03.2024 BIKRAMJEET SINGH AND ANR

...Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN Present :

Mr. D.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Mayuri Lakhanpal Kalia, DAG, Haryana.

Ms. C.S. Jattana, Advocate for Mr. M.S. Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2.

***** HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN , J.

( ORAL) [1] The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.347 dated 23.09.2018, under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa (Annexure P-1), on the basis of compromise dated 21.11.2023 (Annexure P2) arrived at between the parties. [2] Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the FIR was registered at the instance of respondent No.2 on account of a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The petitioner No.1 is husband and petitioner No.2 is mother-in-law of the respondent No.2. He further contends that matter has been settled between the parties and compromise (Annexure P-2) has been executed

- 2between them. He submits that petitioner No.1-husband and respondent No.2wife have filed joint petition for divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which already has been allowed vide judgment and decree dated 19.12.2023 by the Family Court, Sirsa, as such, respondent No.2 does not want to take any action in the present FIR.

[3] Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 has confirmed the factum of compromise between the parties. [4] On 04.12.2023, the parties were directed to appear before the CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording of their statements regarding the compromise.

[5] As per the report dated 24.01.2024, received from the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ellenabad through the District & Sessions Judge, Sirsa, compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. The petitioners have not been declared as "Proclaimed Offenders" and they are not involved in any other criminal case. The joint petition for divorce filed by petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in case No.HMA 953-2023 has already been allowed by Family Court, Sirsa vide judgment and decree dated 19.12.2023.

[6] Learned State counsel has not raised any objection regarding the acceptance of the present petition.

[7] Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the compromise between the parties is genuine and voluntarily made and in view of the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab (SC) 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and the decision of Hon'ble

- 3the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the ends of justice would meet if the FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed by accepting the compromise between the parties.

[8] Consequently, this petition is allowed and FIR No.347 dated 23.09.2018, under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.

[9] However, the respondent No.2 and the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of this order, in case the final terms and conditions of compromise (Annexure P-2) are violated.

[10] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN ) JUDGE 12.03.2024 P.Bhatt Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No